Andrew writes:
Table 1
Interpretations of Marx's Value Theory: Contrasting Implications
Interpretation
Marx's Theoretical Conclusions
Standard (simul-taneous dual-system)
Simul-taneous Single-System
Temporal Single-System
Equalities and Inequalities
profit rate = s/(c + v) ¸ ¸
total price = total value 2 ¸ ¸
total profit = total surplus-value 2 ¸ ¸
values always > 0 3 ¸ ¸
Relations of Determination
profit always > 0 if surplus-labor > 0 3 3 ¸
surplus-labor always > 0 if profit > 0 3 3 ¸
mechanisation itself can reduce profit rate1 ¸
variations in living labour
performed affect profit rate1 ¸
profit rate invariant to distribution of profit1 ¸
profit rate affected by luxury industries1 ¸
inputs lacking value before
production transfer no value ¸
unit values invariant to real wage rate ¸ ¸
unit values invariant to length of working day ¸ ¸
Conclusions deduced 2 4 13
Conclusions negated 11 9 0
Andrew does not mention here that the TSS school and simultaneous
single system school (Fred M) both negate Marx's result of double
divergence.
That is, for both schools
(1)"The value transferred to the product by constant capital is then
given, not as the labour time embodied in its components, but as the
labour time represented by the money paid for it, being its money
price multiplied by the value of money or divided by the monetary
expression of labor time" (Alan Freeman, Alejandro Ramos, Fred M).
(2)if this is so, Marx's talk of double divergence has to be--as
Allin long ago recognized, and I came to understand much
later--gibberish and logically incoherent and should in effect be
ignored.
This is not an idle debating point but goes to the heart of unequal
exchange and the present tumult in global markets.
Some capitalists are not able to retain the new value which is
embodied in their commodities. Which does not mean that the value is
destroyed. It may merely means that some other capitalist has got
hold of it.
For example, say there is a glut of steel. Let's say the glut is so
bad that the steel producers cannot realized, cannot get the price,
any of the new value which they have created in making the steel.
They have to sell to the engineering firms which buy their steel, at
bare cost. Does that necessarily mean that they new value of the
steel is lost? Not at all. It is acquired by the lucky engineering
firms. They get their raw materials unexpectedly cheap. ANd they, if
they are quick, may be able to realize the new value which the steel
makers failed to retain, as well as the value which they have
themselves added, when they sell their finished commodity.
In periods of disturbance such cases of one capitalist group,
purloining the values produced by another, frequenly occur, and they
in part persist until the transfer of capital from one industry to
another can put the matter right.
Rakesh